Skip to main content
Glama

List Folders

hudu_list_folders
Read-onlyIdempotent

List Hudu article folders, filterable by company or name. Pagination and field selection let you control exactly which folder data is returned.

Instructions

List folders in Hudu. A folder groups knowledge-base articles. Folders nest through parent_folder_id, and a folder carrying a company_id belongs to that company rather than to the global knowledge base.

These are article folders. Passwords are organised by a separate password_folders resource with its own tools; do not use these ids there.

The response is flat, not a tree — reconstruct the hierarchy yourself by following each folder's parent_folder_id, which is null at the top level.

On in_company, the API documents exactly one sentence: "When true, only returns company-specific KB articles." It says nothing about what false does, nor how it interacts with company_id. Read it as "restrict to company-scoped folders and exclude global ones", and check the returned company_id values rather than trusting that reading.

Returns an object with items plus pagination facts. Note that the Hudu API returns no total count for any collection, so page_was_full is the only honest signal that more records exist — read pagination_note before concluding a list is complete.

Operation class: Read.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoMatch against the folder name.
pageNo1-based page number. Hudu has no cursor or offset — only pages.
fieldsNoReturn only these top-level fields on each record. Use it to keep large lists small — e.g. ["id","name","company_id"]. Unknown field names are ignored.
page_sizeNoRecords per page (1-100, default 25). Hudu publishes no maximum, so this client clamps at 100; larger values are rejected here rather than silently altered by the server.
company_idNoReturn only folders belonging to this company, by numeric Hudu company id.
in_companyNoDocumented only as "when true, only returns company-specific KB articles" — in practice, restricts the result to folders that belong to a company and excludes global ones. Behaviour when false is undocumented; omit it rather than sending false if you want everything.
response_formatNoOutput shape. 'json' (default) is compact and machine-readable; 'markdown' is easier for a person to read but larger.json
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses that the response is flat (not a tree), that hierarchy must be reconstructed via parent_folder_id, and that the API returns no total count. It also transparently explains the ambiguous in_company parameter and advises verifying with company_id, adding significant behavioral context not available from annotations alone.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is compact yet information-dense. Every sentence earns its place: purpose, differentiation, response structure, parameter caveat, pagination note, and operation class. It is well-organized and front-loaded with the core purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description takes responsibility for explaining the return shape, which it does thoroughly: items, pagination facts, page_was_full as the only honest signal, and pagination_note. It also covers hierarchy reconstruction and company scoping, making it complete for a list tool of this complexity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful nuance: it explains the undocumented behavior of in_company and suggests omitting it rather than sending false, and it clarifies the practical effect of page_size clamping. This goes beyond simple schema documentation, earning a 4.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a clear verb+resource: 'List folders in Hudu.' It then explicitly differentiates from sibling tools by stating that password folders are a separate resource with their own tools and 'do not use these ids there.' This uniquely positions the tool against the many sibling list tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description clearly states when to use the tool (listing article folders) and explicitly warns against using folder IDs for password folders, pointing to the separate password_folders resource. It also provides practical guidance on in_company behavior and pagination, telling the agent to read pagination_note before concluding a list is complete.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/ZenixSolutions/hudu-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server